🚀 go-pugleaf

From: jcooley@world.std.com (John Cooley)
>The real issue is that there's a person spouting opinions that we don't
>agree with and it's best to use any means whatsoever to have him silenced!

So your solution is to silence someone else?

Doesn't make sense.

So long as everyone is doing nothing much more than voicing their
opinion in a free and legal manner it's hard to see what the problem
is.  That's the free marketplace of ideas.

Why does this remind of a few days ago when I criticized the John
Birch Society here and someone jumped on me to claim that I was
somehow thereby violating their rights to hold their opinions? Huh?
What about *my* rights to hold an opinion? Criticizing someone's
opinion doesn't threaten their rights. If that were so how could we
ever hold elections?

I mean what's next? Running a candidate for an office is threatening
the other candidate's "right" to win the election? All political ideas
must go unchallenged otherwise their rights are being violated?

Free speech doesn't mean that no one can criticize speech.

It means, in spirit, that we're opposed to the govt (or equivalent)
passing laws and using its police powers to suppress that speech, OR
the criticism thereof, and round and round.

>Open discussion just leads to a disturbing diversity
>of opinions on any one topic; if we could only get back to the 1950's
>where we all though as one -- there'd be less crime, less problems, less
>wasted effort.  Free Speech has got to go!

Hmm, but this seems to me to be exactly what you are advocating, no?

Otherwise why complain about someone voicing their opinion? Is it just
because you don't agree with them?

--
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD